Smiting Theological Philistines with a Great Slaughter

Main menu

Post navigation

A Proverbs 29:2b Culture

As my family and I were driving home from my son’s 10th birthday party Tuesday night, we had the radio on listening to any updates regarding the final 4 states that would essentially determine the outcome of the election. We stopped at a light and while we waited for it to turn green my wife says to me, “Obama will win.” I think I muttered something like, “We’ll see,” but then she added something like, “There is just too much of a spiritual dimension to all this that people would vote for a president who will be their ultimate demise.”

When Obama was finally declared the victor, we were of course discouraged. I couldn’t really sleep that night; something a number of folks have reported. That is because they see the re-election of Obama as a major shift in the values that shape America. It is more than just our favored sports team loosing a bowl game. What happens in the next four years (bearing that Obama isn’t removed from office over Libya within a few months) will set a trajectory that will have far reaching implications to our daily lives as American citizens.

My taxes will go up, even though I am no where near being categorized as “rich.” Money that I would otherwise save to spend on my family’s well-being, my children’s future, and re-invest into our home is now going to be funneled to the Sandra Flukes of the country to fund their sexually irresponsible livelihood and ability to perform infanticide.

Over time, my freedom to call Mohammed a false prophet who deceives people to eternal damnation will be limited, but that will come after I am forbidden to speak against the perversion of homosexual behavior from a pulpit or in the public square with the threat of being fined or imprisoned. My religious freedom will eventually be eroded by a political party who falsely claim to be for personal freedom and the like.

And that is just a small, small part of the changes we will face.

Regrettably, and much to the collective dismay, there are 60 million people who think this change is a good thing. My wife spoke with a neighbor the morning after the election who thinks the next 4 years will be awesome. But she’s in her early 50s, is on “disability,” and doesn’t really do anything except play with her two dogs.

I know of some progressive hipsters who also think this is an awesome change of life.They’re the ones who believe everyone should live in high density communities like over in Amsterdam, have small families, and bike everywhere rather than own a car. When it comes to paying for all the “goodies” the president and his minions have promised every American, their mindset is like my four year old when it comes to shopping. Upon seeing me pay for groceries with my debit card she asks, “Can I have one of those?” The logic being, “Daddy just bought some cool stuff with a little plastic card. I need to get one of those.” It truly is like what Rush said on his radio program, “A Santa Claus culture.”

But that attitude goes back to what my wife said to me in the car: There is a spiritual dimension to all of this. Our society has cultivated an climate of greed and selfishness that panders to the selfishness already present in the fallen, human condition. I want something and I’m gonna get it and if I can do it at the expensive of another person, then that’s even better.

And this is not just “secular” people either. Christians think this way, too. There is a reason why the Health and Wealth heresy is huge. People have basically turned to the Canaanite fertility gods as the providers of their sustenance, and ergo the spiritual dimension to all of what happened on election night. Obama is like a big TV preacher telling people they can have great lives and be blessed a hundred fold if you give him other people’s money.

I believe God is sovereign over all things, even election results. I was never looking to a Romney/Ryan ticket to be the savior of our society, just as a means to return us to some form of normalcy. I truly believe Obama was allowed to be president a second term for God’s purposes. Honestly, I think it is to maneuver world nations and events toward an end-time scenario. But what ever that purpose is, I trust the Lord. It will be hard. I haven’t been promised anything but maybe being hated for my faith, but I trust the Lord.

But I do admit I am still troubled by what I see, especially the spiritual darkness that led people to stupidly vote for an administration that will be their disaster, a disaster that will also include me and my family.

A number of writers and bloggers have captured my sentiments much better than I can right now, so I refer you to them. I’d encourage you to take a look at these articles when you have the time.

16 thoughts on “A Proverbs 29:2b Culture”

Chantry’s article so well articulated the issue. Thanks for the links to the other two articles.

Yes, it’s very sad, and I also agree that it fits with God’s purposes for strengthening the Middle East to bring about what the Bible tells us will happen at the Second Coming, as well as the Romans 1 judgment on the U.S. as Chantry described, specifically this form of judgment (Obama).

It’s not just those who voted for Obama either, that are happy and content. Even nominal, professed Christians, those who regularly attend church, even “Reformed” churches (but otherwise neglect God’s word, content to go to a superficial-teaching Reformed church) and voted for Romney, act indifferently. Their worldview is more informed by marketwatch.com and Bloomberg news, how various current events affect the stock market, and they don’t see much difference between Obama and Romney — blithely ignorant and unconcerned about the greater issues such as the spread of homosexuality and Islam (and to them modern day Israel has no relevance to the Bible).

What makes such an attitude even harder is when it’s in one’s own home, and that professed Christian thinks of the election results as just a numbers game, and cannot accept the idea of grief and discouragement… “oh you’re too depressing and nobody wants to be around you.” When I point out the biblical example of Jeremiah weeping and grieving, the response is that “well, Jeremiah was probably too depressing and other people didn’t want to be around him either.” I guess that is true, and even this is part of the persecution that we believers must experience, the “slow martyrdom” as Spurgeon described it.

I, too, lament over the state of affairs. I agree with much (not all) of what are saying and what Tom Chantry said in his article.

To be honest, to watch the debates, I couldn’t tell the difference between Obama and Romney. Why? Because I can’t take what either one of the same at face value. They throw out stats left and right. Where did they get these stats? How are those stats slanted in your favor, to prove your point? They say they have plans to balance the budget. Really? What’s the plan? No one answers. They *both* speak in generalities. No specific answers. Both men say they are cutting taxes for the middle class! Obama says Romney is raising taxes on the middle class. Seriously, watching the debates (and the TV ads, for that matter) is nothing more than “he said, he said.” They did not inform me one bit in who is more capable of managing the country. It’s all zingers and punchlines.

Media outlets aren’t too different. They give stats. They give generalized “plans.” They skew stats and spin data to suit their platform. The liberal MSM does this heavily (like the whole Mourdock thing, what a croc), but so does Fox and other “conservative” outlets. Everybody’s got an answer for each other. Again, he said, he said.

Then again, Americans, for the most part, ask for this… self included. From what I understand, way back in the day, in debates they actually addressed issues beyond, “Trust me, I’ll fix it.” Candidates spoke for 30 minutes at a time. There may have been zingers, but those were hardly the entire content of their response. There was meat. But not today.

My real lament is that we are a culture content with zingers. We are Israel satisfied with the physique of Saul, rather than someone who can actually lead. Because we don’t know how to pick leaders!! Where does a teenager nowadays learn how to discern good leadership? He’s not taught political science in school. He’s not even taught had to manage a household budget, let alone learn the impact of a federal budget. We don’t know what to look for, so politicians just throw us bones. We get exactly what we want.

I really believe that the vast majority of people vote based on the reputation of the parties. The popular reputation of Republicans is that they don’t give a hoot about anyone other than rich, white males. That may not be true, but that’s the reputation. And as our nation’s ethnic makeup changes (and it is, massively), that reputation will have a monster impact on voting. The Democratic reputation is “We care about social issues.” That translates to they care about women and minorities. Again, their policies may not reflect this, but that’s the reputation. People don’t vote on policies; they vote on reputation. Fix the reputation, you fix the problem.

Seriously, try this: go ask somebody on the street why they voted, and see if they can give an answer dealing with a real plan, hard facts, or anything not dealing with their felt reputation of the party of candidate. I would bet that both Republicans and Democrats voted based on perception, not reality.

I voted for Romney mostly because of the abortion and marriage issues (and, btw, it’s doubtful that he’d do anything do overturn Roe v Wade; that would be political suicide. But Obama could certainly make abortion worse, so Romney would just be keeping the status quo). When it comes to economics or foreign policy, I saw nothing from either side that really laid out plans. And from media sources, I constantly had to question the legitimacy of the stats or projections provided. All I heard was, “I’ll fix it.” I can all but guarantee that if Romney’s plan didn’t work, they’d blame Obama, just like Obama blamed Bush, and Bush blamed Clinton. Every administration inherits the previous administration’s problems. 4 years (or 8 years) really is not a long time to implement plans. That part of the system is broken.

Anyway, I agree with you: it’s spiritual, greed is a major component. I am sure people are voting against true self-interest. But I also think ignorance and laziness are major problems. It starts at home, but if it’s not already at home, then people simply will not learn how to discern a quality presidential candidate.

BTW, this is why Obama is a political genius. People voted for a celebrity, which is exactly what Obama is. He was on Letterman. He’s got swag. His wife is cool. He’s got cool zingers like Romney Hood and “horses and chariots.” And his speeches, however empty, are filled with feel-good lines. He makes himself very likable. He is example A-1 of why people give celebrities a soap box. Clint Eastwood, Sean Penn, Brad Pitt, George Clooney — all celebs who use their celebrity status to spin political activism. Obama basically reversed it. Got himself in People, plays ball with NBA players and tweets stuff about pop culture.

We’re on the same page here, Fred. I think we have to see this election through the lens of not only God’s sovereignty, but His determination to bring about the end-time scenario that centers around Israel, Jerusalem, and the Middle East. And Obama certainly appears to advance that agenda. Once again, the Bible is extremely relevant and we can only make sense of the world if we understand God’s word. Thanks for your post and perspective.

Obama will never be removed. The House can impeach, but the Senate has to remove (remember Clinton? And he is viewed by some as a victim of GOP partisan politics). And we all know where Harry Reid, gets his orders.

It’s interesting how people are lamenting the “demise of modern society” because of this election, while somehow western Christianity was able to survive Rome in a time when religious liberty was squelched, and when homosexuality and abortion were the societal norms. Certainly, I’m not happy about the trends we’re seeing in those areas. On the other hand, Romney’s promise to beef up the military so we can continue to wantonly kill brown people is equally troubling (why does no one ever talk about the spiritual dimension of that?). Nevertheless, I will observe the penchant for melodrama post-election, and I wonder if your post is a good example.

That sounds negative, and I don’t want to give you the impression that I’m down on you or or blog — which was linked from the “Team Pyro” website. I like your appeal to God’s sovereignty and the supremacy of Christ. I think some of these trends *are* probably linked to the end times. But if I can, allow me to encourage you in this: Please don’t trust the government to legislate the principles of our faith, because that’s “big government,” too. Christianity is compelling — it’s vibrant — and it’s true. We all need to embrace this rather than expecting Uncle Sam to make it so. I firmly believe that, if practiced correctly, Christianity doesn’t need the support of government to maintain its relevance, even in an “end-times” world. We should be disappointed if Nero were elected king, and while Obama is nothing like that, it’s okay to be a little sad. But as for me, I don’t expect my government to promote the ideals of my faith, and therefore I’m not disappointed when it doesn’t.

Yes, that one is a given, there’s no getting rid of Obama by impeachment. They couldn’t even remove Clinton after his egregious offenses, only impeach him. And the only reason Nixon left was his own voluntary resignation (when they were about to impeach him), his not wanting to cause strife and harm to the nation: a character trait that Clinton and Obama lack.

Nick,
I appreciate you coming by and leaving a comment, but I hate it that the first thing I need to do is smack you on your very first visit. You write,

On the other hand, Romney’s promise to beef up the military so we can continue to wantonly kill brown people is equally troubling (why does no one ever talk about the spiritual dimension of that?).

This is probably the most ignorant, asinine thing I’ve heard anyone say. You seriously think the US military goes around country to country wantonly killing “brown people?” I’m afraid you have been cold cocked up side the head by leftist, anti-American drivel.

The reason why it is worrisome that Obama’s administration is downsizing the US military is the fact that our military is the one major force for good in the world. We are the ones who keep trade routes opened from hostile pirates and countries who wish to choke the ability for nations to do commerce. Our military is the force that keeps crazy dictators at bay and when there is a disaster like in Japan or Hati, we have the ability to protect relief efforts. When our military is downsized you will see our enemies swarm in to fill the vacuum we leave. We don’t want that. It isn’t a good thing, and it certainly isn’t this stupid notion that we are these colonialists killing “brown people.”

Fred, thank you for your encouragement both in your blog and via email. After our discussion, I decided to write a response after all.

It has been suggested in this meta and elsewhere, that we ought not to grieve because God is in control. The problem here is a keen lack of self awareness. The reason for the grief isn’t because we fear the future or worry about God’s providence. The grief stems from the fact that God blessed us with a nation, purchased with the blood of our forefathers, that allowed us to worship according to our conscience with unparalled freedom. This nation not only allowed us to worship freely but the wealth by which we have supported thousands of missionaries, printed millions of Bibles, translated the Bible into virtually every tongue, fed countless people, and protected many from the teeming hordes of sinful men. Proverbs 13:22 says “A good man leaves an inheritance for his children’s children but the wealth of the unrighteous is laid up for the righteous.” What have we left our children and their children?! And who do we have to blame for it? God? No. We have only ourselves to blame and therein, is the root of our grief.

It has also been suggested that government cannot legislate “the principles of our faith.” This expresses a profound ignorance that only Americans may enjoy. Yes, Christianity spread through Rome despite persecution. But how is that principle working out in North Korea or Iran, or Syria or Egypt? Christians there are being decimated. But guess where Christianity is flourishing? The former Soviet states that are now independent. Sure, government can’t regulate our spirit. But it can decide whether we may congregate together for worship. It may decide whether we may have printed Bibles. It may decide whether we may be able to financially support ministries. In short, goverment may affect our “principles of faith” in a profound way.

As Christians we should be wary of blaming the 53% of whatever that voted for Obama. Progressives have been working tirelessly for generations to take over every bastion of society. We let them. The Democrats worked for five years for this election, establishing offices in every major city to get out the vote. They work day and night giving time and money to the cause. They demand loyalty at every level. And what did we do? We thought that casting up a couple prayers to God would save us. It’s as if we decided we’d pray to God for food but leave the plowing, seeding, reaping, and baking to somebody else. You say politics isn’t the answer but the Gospel. Fine. What have you done in that effort?

Moving on…the other problem is that Christians, mainly those of certain ethnicities, voted for Obama. We have a problem in our church. We talk about the love of Christ but we fail to talk about obedience. And above that, we fail to talk about what obedience looks like in the life of a modern believer. Like getting off your butt and voting.

Fred attended to Nick’s comment about U.S foreign policy. Nick’s comment betrays what is a common ignorance within Christian circles. That is this notion that “just war” means having a foreign policy like that of a turtle. We are to simply pull our limbs into our shells and wait for the storm to pass. When a country goes to war against a nation of people that are filled with rapists, murders, and thieves, it is a just war. Our mistake is in thinking that man is good and that if we simply free him, he will do good. No…what we should have done is what God did in the O.T.: eliminated all evil. Seek it out, kill it without mercy.

Final thought. The time for grief is over. Our nation is headed along the path of California. It’s inevitable without revival. But revival will not come if we don’t get out and work for it. Also, revival doesn’t mean we don’t have to attend to the practical matters of day to day life. This means keeping abreast of political activities and devoting time to its maintenance.

Let’s just hope that we suffer for being Christians and not because our neighbors are stupid. It’s one thing for somebody to throw stones at you because they hate God. It’s another for them to hit you with a stone because they were foolishly throwing rocks around. I suspect we’ll suffer more in the latter than the former, at least in the short term.

Romney does not represent Christianity – he is a Mormon! Neither does Obama. Change in a society’s values come about when PEOPLE change, and it is God alone who changes hearts. So carry on being light and salt – WE have Christ in us, the hope of glory! So WE are the values, we are the light, we are the hope.

The GOP marginalized and otherwise alienated the only person (Ron Paul) it could have put forward to actually win the 2012 presidential election. The bulk of ‘em are lickin’ their wounds blinkin’ at one another today, wonderin’, “What just happened?!” By conservative estimates, some 11-14 MILLION voters stayed home who voted on election day in 2008. With talent on loan from God, Rush Limbaugh provides the statistic that only 3 million of these were republicans. That means 8-11 MILLION democrats and third-party candidates didn’t figure any of the candidates worth their time or effort to vote. Now, given the fervor generated by the main-stream media, both political parties, and most churches during this presidential election, why do you think that 11-14 million people stayed home … 3 million of them republicans? Any clue? Any clue at all? If you voted for Romney, then you KNOW good and well just how exercised the GOP was to “get out the vote.” If you’re a republican who voted for Romney, then BEYOND getting to the core of the enigma as to why 3 million of your own “kind” stayed you, you ALSO have to ask yourself the question: “Why didn’t the other 8-11 million people vote? How is it that 8-11 million people – the vast majority of them being democrats – missed the significance of this election?! How in the WORLD is that possible?” I submit to you that 11-14 million people did NOT miss the significance of this election. What they missed was a candidate who actually represented a difference and who could actually win the race. (You will also note that the Libertarian party ran the best presidential campaign in its short history – garnering some 1.2 million votes; more than twice what it drew in the ’08 elections!) I submit to you that the vast majority of these 11-14 million people would have changed party allegiances and would have voted for a Republican candidate if someone significantly different than Obama had been put forward by the RNC. All these people knew good and well that Romney in the White House meant little substantive change in either foreign or domestic policy. Further, I submit to you that the vast majority of these 8-11 million democrats would have voted for Ron Paul, along with the vast majority of the 3 million republicans who stayed home, and the the vast majority of the 1.2 million who voted Libertarian (who knew they weren’t gonna win anyway), and the vast majority of those who actually DID vote for Romney (who are clearly more party-motivated than ideologically motivated). Had the RNC chosen Ron Paul instead of scripting Romney, the GOP would have won the election by a landslide! But when the RNC scripted Romney as its “man”, it meant 3 million republicans and a whole boat-load of disillusioned democrats looking at one-another, wondering, “So tell me again, what’s the difference between these two?” And if there is no fundamental difference, then why vote at all? Can anyone offer a better reason why 3 million republicans stayed home (and why countless others of them wrote-in Ron Paul’s name on their ballot)? Better yet, can you give a reasonable argument for the fact that some 8-11 million democrats flat-out REFUSED to give Obama a historical landslide by changing party affiliation and voting for Romney? I haven’t read a reasonable suggestion yet. Limbaugh is NOW decrying the faux-conservativism of Romney. But the Paul campaign decried that from the very beginning! During the primaries, Paulbots were labeled kooks and whackjobs for that kind of criticism of the GOP. Strangely enough (he says with tongue planted firmly in cheek) today it’s only the left that levels this same criticism at Limbaugh for saying what the Paul campaign has always said! The vast majority of republicans are shruggin’ their shoulders, muttering to themselves “Maybe Limbaugh’s right? We have drifted a bit, ya know?” You republicans towing the party-line have no one to blame but yourselves on this one. As a registered republican, I refuse to accept the blame for your lack of conservativism. I wrote-in the other republican’s name, Ron Paul! You forced my hand on this point. And unless the GOP wakes up and smells the pizza, they’re in for a absolutely CRUSHING defeat in 2016 – given we’re not under martial law by then, having to forego an election due to the civil war!

Horatio, Ron Paul had zero chance at being elected. He is as much a politician as the next guy, only worse because he has a total lack of understanding of money and a foreign policy akin to an Ostrich.

Furthermore, the voting populace votes for personal peace and prosperity. Most voters believe the government assists with this by having an ample safety net. The Republican establishment tries to moderate the conservative fiscal view of government by offering a smaller safety net but not eliminating it altogether.

The libertarian view platform may be popular with drug users but will be wholly unpopular with everyone who desires at least some government assistance since the libertarian ideal is virtually no government. And legalizing drugs is a misguided attempt to obtain more voters because it fails to account for the fact that democrats will do anything to keep voters. They’ll just make drug legalization part of their platform. And since drug users aren’t nearly as productive as normal citizens, they’ll be attracted to hefty government programs. Drug legalization will also cost more than the “drug war” as is evidenced by the cost of alcohol and tobacco so the fiscal impact will result in more people in prison, not less, more drug rehabilitation programs, not less, and more crime, not less. Again, this will make the citizens want more government programs which the democrats offer and the libertarians will not.

The libertarians think that they can keep morals and fiscal matters separate. Fiscal policy is always linked to one’s morals. Liberal social beliefs will always lead to liberal fiscal policies. Currently, 50% of the population said they don’t care about morals. They don’t care about long term fiscal consequences (or don’t understand or believe in them). They only care that there is some government program available for them.